tv Charlie Rose PBS September 22, 2011 11:40pm-12:35am EDT
between. israelis deserve to live in peace and security, palestinians deserve to live in peace and security. and the similarities between the two people are enormous. are enormous. and we can do it. we can live together. we can end this abnormal situation and move t normality of life. >> rose: we conclude with the case for israel from ron prosor, israel's ambassar to the united nations and mort zuckerman, american businessman who's a strong supporter of israel. >> israel does not object to the palestinian state. the prime minister of the state of israel stands and repeats day in and day out, people just don't listen, i am for palestinian state, i am for two states for two people solution and i'm willing morrow morning to meet abu mazen to talk to him
without any pre-conditions about statehood and about security and about overall peace. >> i think a sense what the united states has to stand for are certain sort of immutable principles in that negotiation andtherefore, you know, the united states is opposed to what the palestinians are seeking to do, which is really not just to have the resolution, it's the terms of the resolution that will make a negotiation much more difficult and the united states knows better than anybody the attempts to have negotiations privately between the parties which have been turned down by the palestinians. the united states is very much aware of this. so they understand, really, what's been going on and not just what people say has been going on. >> rose: the palestinian statehood issue at the united nations when we continue.
>> rose: saeb erakat is here, he is the chief palestini negotiator. he has been at ther of negotiations with israelor more than a decade. he was involved in craing the oslo accords. he also participateed in the netiations at camp david. he's a member of the palestinian liberation organization's executive committee. all eyes will be on mahmoud abbas tomorrow as he submits his applicatn for full u.n. membersh. the united states has said it will veto the bid at the security council. i'm very pleased to have saeb erakat back at this table. welcome. >> thank you, charlie. >> rose: thank you for coming. before we talk about specics, give me a sense of history and this momt in the history of the palestinian people. >> i was born to do one thi: to bring back palestine to the geographic map. in your country you hear about boy that's interrupted, a girl that's interrupted. in our case, a whole people, a whole nation was interrupted.
we were crossed from the map, we were turned into refugees, we were turned into terrorists, we were turned into no one wants us and now we're coming here, it's time to bring palestine back and we're notoing it... (inaudible) israel's right to exist. all we want to do is to have palestine admitted to live side by side the '67 lines with the statof israel. what's wrong with that? and then we see all this reaction, the politics, the threats of vetoes, all this campaign against us. look, inow, i know as palestians we are... this country there's things about voting influence and so on. we don't stand a chance, but
we're the peacemakers. 're the ones who nt to live with israel side by side. we have recognized theight of them to exist and we want to do that through negotiations and the other issue that i feel from a historical perspective, lo at syria, libya. i believe what's happening in the arab states today, the most important thing in the last one thousand years of arab history d i they because these people are not demanding better jobs or better checks. they want to see with their eyes hear with their ears and speak with their lips. people in my world are sick and tired of politics, hugging saddam hussein when he fights a crazy war against iran calling him a good dictator and then fighting him as a bad dick stateor when he ventures into occupying kuwait or looking at qaddafi as mother teresa a few months ago because of investments and then coming
him afterwards. there are two things, charlie that are required ord to bring the middle east into stability, democracy, human rights,omen's rights and so on. one, the peace between palestinians and israes (inaudible) it's two states, '67 with a mutually agreed swaps with with all the securities that are required. the second thing in the middle east today is democracy in the arab world and anyone who says arabs are not ready for democracy is a racist. that's what we need. you cannot defeat extremism with marines and gun ships. you cannot defeat ideas with ideas. i'm a muslim. it's one of the best... it's a good religion. we're supposed to go to mosques to worship god not to use god. the military goes to the mosque to use god, we're going to have bloodshed. we know that. but in order to defeat these forces who employ religion and
want to use god in our mosques, these two elements are required. >> rose: this thursday morning as we tape this conversation for broadcast on thursday evening where are the negotiations? is there a search for a... continued search for some foular have they in a sense not led to any change in your innt, in the palestinians' intent to go to the security council and get a vote? >> charlie, presidentbbas said so many times that our choice is negotiations. realistically speaking, you mak it whatever you want out of the u.n., but at the enof the day issues like jerusalem (inaudible) have to be solved through negotiations. bilaral negotiations with israis. we have never closed the doors to negotiations. president obama invited us last year. we came to washington, we went to sharm el-sheik in egypt, we went to prime minister netanyahu's home in west jerusalem.
and then when he was put to the task to say... just to step two states on 1967, to utter these mbers, 1-9-6-7, in any language and he can't say it in any language and then he has an obligation to stop settlement activities. he does these two things we will negotiate tonight. negotiations is the only path to achieve a solution for all these core issues, including independence. negotiations are not contradicting or contradictory to the fact that we want to add palestine to the members of nations, to become a country under occupation. >> rose: suppose, he would say, "i'm prepared to say that. aru yoprepared to guarantee my security? are you prepared to tel me that
israel can live in peace and security?" >> i'm prepared. (inaudible) in '67. by the way, charlie, 78% of (inaudible) and accept it to have a palestinian state and they remain 22%. not only that, we have accepted to have minor swaps in size and value. >> rose: recognizing some settlements. >> well, we're notoing to have any obstacles to making a stark resolution. th is a concession we made. and we had extensive negotiations. and they told us that palestine will not have armies, navies, or air forces. our response to them was, you know, the price of one tank equals two schools. we want the two schools. israel is a country with 3,000 fighting planes, nuclear weapons and we said to the israelis, if
the choices are between the tank or the two schools, we'll take two schools. anwe further than that said to them, look, we can inte nato forces. god forbid not israel, not jordan, not egypt. to palestine. and we can accommodate our national security whereby this non-combating forces will make sure that we are obliged... abe by our agreements, they can monit our airports, our harbors, our passages. make sure nobody smuggles or develops or anything. and this criteria was done by a fine gentleman named general jim jones who became the national security advisor of president obama for the first two years of his term. he resigned now. i think he left and we completed this. and then on borders, charlie, we have reached a point where maps were exchanged between prime minister olmert-- the previous
prime minister of israel-- and presidt abbas. prime mister olmert offered a map (inaudible) when he says i agree with him. he offered a map of 6.5% he wants to take from the west bank. and he said "i'll give back 5.8% from israel." and the 0.7% will be safe passage between the west bank and gaza. president abbas countered this offer with a map offering to have an exchange on the '67 lines of 1.9%. unfortunately, at that moment in history theyrought olmert down. we were unable to continue. so psident abbas came to this untry, he saw president bush, he gave him the maps and he told him this is... we' almost there. and we tried to do something in the last days of president bush, we could not. and then this whole file went to the new administration.
now, if you want to test mr. netanyahu... i mean, if mr. netanyahu is genuine, okay, fine. here's the choice of israelis (inaudible) but when president obama spoke with him, i wld have thought the first thing to tell him, sir, you're serious about two states? show me your map. because, you know, for someone to take his strategy as public relation his policies as public relations, that doesn't save lives of palestinians and israelis. and charlie i'm a person who doesn't see things pro-israel/pro-palestinian. the world is divided between those who are pro-peace and those who are against peace. and that's the truth. i'm not doingny favor (inaudible). >> rose: do you believe prime minister netanyahu wants peace but somehow has domestic political considerations that prevent him from doing what he would like to do? >> i believe mr. netanyahu has... if he wants to make peace
he has... first of all 70% to 75% of israelis want nothing more than peace and a two-state solution. that's the true. 70% to 75% of palestinians are the same. if mr. netanyahu wants to change his coalition he has parties in israel that will join him if he utters the sentence "i accept two states in '67 and if you stop settlements." he has the choice. >> rose: the day before the president-- your president and the israeli prime minister will speak-- where are we? >> i was with the president abu mazen when he met with president obama and madam clinton. and i think the meeting was clear, so candid. there are differences.
president obama from day one was against our option of going to the u.n. he said that to us. >> rose: tried to convince you out of that choice. >> me tried to convince us out of this choice and then again he said if i have to be the veto, i'll use the veto. he said that his commitment to the two states is unwaivering. and he will do everything in his power, he's as frustrated as we are. and then he believed that the only way to achieve this is through negotiatio. abu mazen responded to him by saying "i don't see the contradiction between ur commitment to two states and between my attempt to regnize... to have palestine admitted to the u.n. and then abu mazen said, you know, had we had partners in israel, israel should have come with us and took us by the hand to make our application to say, yes, finally we ve a two-state solution. >> rose: at the end of that meeting, where are you? >> we were... he said i will leave the veto. abu mazen told him i will submit
the application. >> rose: take me through this. you submit the application. when is your expectation that there will be a vote and a.s. veto? >> i don't know. rose: is it weeks? is it months? >> i think it's weeks. >> rose: it's weeks? >> there are legal procedures and due process. we submit application to secretary general, the secretary general hands it to the head of the security council-- which is lebanon, by the way. and then they have to form a committee and in some cases, like in the case of south sudan i think took less than nine hours for the committee to finish. in the case of israel it took nine months. in the case of macedonia (inaudible). so in the applications there's something due process, legal process that weill understand. two weeks, three weeks, four weeks, whatever. but there will be some political maneuvering, someone trying to shelve our application because the pressure being... >> rose: right, right.
>> on the member stat is unbelievable. is unbelievable. >> rose: what kind of pressure? >> well we hear that some senators are saying they will cut the aid to the u.n. and these nations will be held accountable to their votes and so on. what? for saying we want two states? we want palestine to live side by side with the state of israel in'. we're going to punish them for that? >> rose: there is no pressure that will prevent president abbas from goin ahead-- and you-- on behalf of the palestinian people for a statehood application to the security council? >> nothing. >> rose: no fresh injury? no threat? no alternative idea? >> charlie,e're not surprising you, we're not surprising president obama, we're not
surprising the europeans or arabs. we have told everyone that in the 23rd of september we have the we will submit our application for membership in the security council. is that our strategy? no. i' be very honest with you, charlie. the palestinian authority was born in a contract with israel order to transfer palestinians from occupation to independence. this prime minister of israel came and he took away from us our legal jurisdiction, economic jurisdiction, secuty jurisdiction and he booked himself as a authority wherehe continues to create fts on t ground (inaudible) policies. so at the end of the day we are with a two-state solution. 'sns so message from us. s.o.s. messagerom us. if mr. netanyahu choice is t
keep himself as a social authority then he may find himself very sorry as the only authority from jordan to the mediterranean. >> rose: now that means what? >> that means that authority cannot continue and it's not sustainable. >> rose: you're saying if there is no two-state solution than... >> then it will be mr. netanyahu choosing to be the occupied power from the river jordan and the mediterranean and he should really study carefully the occupying power responsibilities as he did in 1992 before the palestinian authority s born. >> ros the argument of tony blair at this table, the argument of american officials-- as you know-- has been the way to get a two-statesolutions is negotiations. when the president of the united states says the way to do this is a two state solution and you know i want a two-state solution you say. >> mr. president, if i give you my c.v. it's one item-- negotiator. i've done nothing many my life
but negotiate. >> ros so you are saying negotiations have failed. >> i'm not saying... negotiatns did not fail. >> rose: negotiations had nothing to do with this. >> negotiations are the means and not the objective. we told him sir, there is a government in israel that is trying to just sre points against us to corner us we're no match for them in your country and we're not going into this game of public relations. we're talking about the lives of israelis and palestinians. we're talking about the whole region that must be transferred to democracy, human rights, women's rights and so on. we cannot be subjected to an israeli occupation and to keep us... abu mazen wasn't born to be called president, saeb erakat wasn't born to be called negotiator. we're peacemakers but we're patriots. we want to deliver from occupation to independence. >> rose: one of the issues-- and i want to speak to this while you're here at this table-- is the difference between the palestinian community.
>> we have 36 political parties... >> rose:s is supportive of this. >> well, hamas not only is not supporti of this, hamas did a cue day at the in gaza. you know, i have... cue day at the. if abu mazen can't show a map of tend game agreement two states in '67 we will preil. if i'm unable to show a map, hamas will prevail. my differences with hamas is not over an economic program, educational program or so on, it'setween someone who is say negotiations is my way, peaceful means, avoid violence. >> rose: is there any move within the hamas cmunity to move towards that? are they changing at all in terms of where they see the future of a palestinian state? >> well, i think in the reconciliation meeting in cairo
may 4, i was sitting there and he said i accept two states on 1967. this was a shocking statement to me. this was really... (inaudible) but he said it. >> rose: right. >> he said it. and when i sat with him afterwards you can see abu hasen in his residence in cairo and i said him mr. mashal did you say that? he said i said that because i believe that (inaudible) so if we can show a movement towards a two-state solution, why do you ha to worry? we're going to go to a national referendum on this agreement. then we're going to go to elections. we have the palestinians. when abu mazen came here, he had submitted an application to the security council. when presint sarkozy came to him and said... he said to him,
sir, i will take (inaudible) but i have t put it in front of the leadership when i go back to palestine and i hope that we can respond to you as soon as possible. we cannot... he's not a one man show. we don't have a one man show in palestine. it's institutions, the rule of law, women's rights, democracy. and that's the true. >> rose: so suppose there is in two weeks an application and thens that u.s. veto. what happens then? >> do you go then to the general assembly? that's an option. >> rose: is that what' likely to happen? >> that's an option. but the other thing is that the other option may be is to say that if we have a veto, ifhere are no negotiations settlements continue u.s. congress continues to cut aid, israelis are withholding our taxes. >> rose: which they have threatened to do. >> and merely the option wl be powers and responsibility.
>> rose: you really think it willome to that? >> all i know is that i'm not bluffing. i'm in no position to reaten anyone. i'm a pson that will have negotiated a two-state solution we have no army, no navy, no air force, no economy. it's my word against any of the israelis in the senate and the congress and i don't stand a chance. my people are fragmented. all i want to do is, you know, to make sure that we have a two-state solution not because i'm doing the israelis a favor because i'm doing myself a favor. i don't want myself to be a suicide bomber, charlie. i'll do anything to prevent that >> is it possible the united states... the president who said last night "i will veto this" will n veto this? something could change to make him... >> i hope so but from the way he
spoke to us last night... and by the way, to his critics. i came to washington five times in as many months to aue with him, to see if we can make an opportunity out of it, to even draft the thing together. >> rose: and? >> they wereo con sis different day one. we will... veto? >> the u.n. is not an option. not the security council, not the general assembly and if you force us in the security council, we will use the veto. that's what i heard from themin january, that's what i heard last night from president obama. >> rose: what's the contradiction? >> because somewhere in israel they said this is not an option, you move the elements of congress and i don't know what are the politics in this country. that's not good. that's not good for israel's interests. that's not good for america's interests. we're the peacemakers. we're the ones who recognize israel. we want to make peace, avoid violence. you should stand shoulder to shoulder with us.
is the majority of israelis want much more than... you know what touched me more than anything? two weeks ago a group o about 40, 60 israelis came t see abu hasen in ramallah. they were professors, ex-generals, intellectuals and all of them... (inaudible) the whole cost told abu mazen i fought f iael. i'm a zionist. i'm coming he to give you th application of support and (inaudible)ly fight for israel again. but i believe what you're doing is really staining the two state solution and sustaining israel. dot retract. one other person was a director
of israel's foreign ministry. he stood up and sd americans should be ashamedand europeans should be ashamed. i speak israelis. most of them are in this line. now there are those in israel who don't see me, rese to see me. they think as palestinians or arabs we have one name, one face one eyes, one ear. that's not good. that's not good. but that's up to them to decide. >> rose: you can't sit down with the foreign minister. >> i don't think he wants to sit with me. the foreign minister is calling for my expulsion. for god's sake, israel's foreign minister a settler! he lives in the illegal settlement. he's a settler. and if that's the case aut who's who and who will bring the (inaudible) i don't stand a chance. i don't stand a chance on that but i'm the peacemaker. we're the group who wants to
make peace with israel not war with israel. that's goods for everyone. that's the interest of israelis. i know that isrlis have not felt their conscious aching for my suffering. i know i'm not... did not wake up one morninging (inaudible) for the jewish people sfering. conflicts between individuals, between nations is about (inaudible) of interest that we should monitor very carefully. or in for someone to (inaudible) with the weak party negotiating in order to enable them... (inaudible) it's not in your interest to be in accordance with a zero-sum game whereby we will win, i assure you. that's what some israelis are saying. question assure you. america is where we want it. president abbas knows we have to
continue settlements and we know what's best for you and if you don't do that your mother may be related to bin laden." who is this serving? does this serve a single israeli life or a single palestinian life? because at t end of the day that's the question. palestinians and israelis are sick and tired of taking their children to the cemeteries. chare, i was 12 years old when this occupation came to my hometown, jecho. today i'm 46. i'm a grandfather of three children. three beautiful children and all i'm doing is trying to give them another way. there is another way. why must ty refuse to see it. for whose interests? >> rose: ihink as you know what they say is we're far two-state solution but the way to do this is negotiations. >> if you see israelis come into your shop (inaudibl richest
negotiator. would senator mitch who will i think lives in new york and is still alive... >> rose:ery much so. >> ambassad david hale and mr. daniel shapiro who's now the american ambassador to israel and had with me eight papers. my fallback positions on jerusalem, borders, settlements, refugees, end of conflict, end of came, end of map. and i said i think it's time for decisions now. let's help our leaders make the decisions. these are my positions. take it. i was thinking thati'm really anging the rules of the game, not hiding anything because we reach the decisions. he refused to take it from me. >> rose: did he say why? >> he said the coalition nature,
this, that. but then abu mazen went to his me and was jerusalem on the 15th of december last year and he sat with him and in the meeting was secretary clinton and senator mitchell. and he had two papers one on security and one on borders and he told him sir, m prime minister, i know you worry about security, you have a point. let me offer you this paper on security to begin with and borders. and he shrug it had paper aside and he told him, look, you d't need this. the israeli army needs to stay in the jordan valley and the central mountain for let's say 40 years.
so abu mazen looked at him and told him "sir, contie your occupation." what you're offering... that's not about fairness and justice and the truth, and that's why i told you, charlie, sincerely, my life is not divided between those who are (inaudible) it's between... that's what people should focus on. israelis deserve to live in peace and security. palestinians deserve to live in peace and security. and the similaritiebetween the two people are enormous. are enormous. and we can do it. we can live together. we can end this abnormal situation and move to the normality of life. >> rose: thank you for coming. it was a pleasure to see you
again. we will watch closely. the context of what you have said, what happens on friday, what happens in the coming weeks i hope you'll come back as we follow this. >> thank you, charlie. >> rose: we continue our conversation about the palestinian authority's bid for statehood through the u.n. security council with problem prosor, israel's ambassador to the unitedti onnands at mor zuckerman, editor and chi of "u.s. news and world report" and owner of the "new york daily news." i am pleased to have both of them here to address this very important question, which is the talk of new york and was the conversation with saebrakat that preceded this interview. so i begin with you and the question of statehood and the application to the security council. israel's objectiono this is? >> first of all, israel does not object to the palestinian state. the prime minister of the state of israel snds and repeats day in and day out, people just don't listen "i am r a
palestinian stat i amor two states for two people solution and i'm willing tomorrow morning to meet abu mazen to talk to him without any preconditions about statehood. and about security and about overall peace. >> rose: and abu mazen has rejected that request to meet personally to talk about statehood and this application to the union? >> yes. and why? because at the end of the day then you can't circumvent that, peace by definition is an agreement by two sides. you can't impose peace. when we did peace with egypt, it wasn't imposed, it was negotiated. when we did peace with jordan, it wasn't imposed, it was negotiated. with the palestinians themselves during the oslo accords and the 1995 interim agreements and the agreement paris we talked to the palestinians. we have 40 spheres of corporation. i was personally at the u.n. now on the donor's conference and
you should have seen the areas of corporation in humanitarian, economic, security issues. now, what are the palestinians saying? look, you know what? i really is a problem because the issues are hard, they're tough, they're not easy so we're going do something unilaterally. wee going outo the united nationspeaking to the israelis and trying to impose something from the outside. those short cuts won't work. >> rose: they say the following: we want to negotiate but we also wanto be a state and the negotiations will continue. we want to negotiate. but we also want the dignity of being a state and we want to make that application because we have tried negotiations for a long time. they're not denying the continuation of negotiations. >> let's talk about the issue of statehood. you have mahmo abbas whose name is the president of the palestinian authority.
he has zero authority in gaza. zero authority. he hasn't visited gaza since 2009. so instead of running around the world in order to achieve peace with us, first of all control what you have. and if you don't control at least 50% of what youave and say that y're not responsible for what happens from gaza day in and day out against israeli citizens, what i'm trying to say is that there are many problems because it's half baked. they're coming over and saying to us and the world give us what weant unilaterally and then we'll go backwards in trying to achieve peace. >> rose: that's what i'm trying to understand. he's not saying give us what we want. he's saying we want to be a state and we want to negotiate all these issues having to do with border, refugees and the site of our capital. we want to negotiate that. we're not asking you to giv that. want to be a state, though. >> but the resolution that they want in the general assembly is going to have terms that are
gog to basically be pre-conditions they want definitions of what the borders of the state are to be in the resolution. now let me just say one thing about the borders. there's one pre-condition actually to the border which is is what are the serity arrangements going to be because this is critical. they've got to know they're not going to be faceed with when gaza became overtaken by hamas, et cetera. so i think this is why the... in a sense these issues are not unrelated. they have to be put together and negotiated as a package and that can only be done as the ambassador says, between israel and the palestinians and a lot of people, including myself have devoted great amounts of time to trying to make negotiation possible. it's always been my view, by the way, that these negotiations can not be done publicly, they have to be done in a private channel because otherwise... nor can other people give speeches on this, for example, and i... when
the presiden for emple, came up with the settlement freeze, this was not a pre-condition on the part of the palestinians, they've negotiated for 15 years without that. once it becomes atatement of the president as one of the leading palestinians said, we can't be less palestinian than the american president. so these things are dangerous because if they aren't negotiated between the parties and privately it's much more difficult to get an agreement. >> just to add to this, you know they're basically saying the world has to understand they're saying exactly what mort zucker man is saying. we would only go back into the negotiations with a direct statement of '67, they're beginning negotiations before the negotiations with pre-conditions. and if there's one thing that i think region needs now is, you know, the unilateral act is bad
for peace. i think it's bad... >> rose: tell me why it's bad for peace. >> it's bad for peace bause... i'll give you an example, okay? south sudan was saying... the 193rd state in the united nations. everyone cheer and said yes. what process did they pass? do they like the north sudanese? no. do they kill each other in? yes. do ty hate eachother? yes. but they went the hard way and there's no short cuts. they sat down with negotiations, sleeess nights, frustrations. only then doou ce back to the united nations when you directly negotiate with a partner that you have to negotiate with. by the way, you should know we are not reaching an agreement not because we don't understand each other because we understand each other very well. the president of the ited states said a cole of truths yesterday in his speech. israel is rrounded not by countries like lech ten stein
and luxembourg on the map. israel is under constant threat and look what's happening with the region. israel and the israeli people have shown they're willing to do great concessions in order to live in peace. tangibles with egypt, with jordan. but we... at the end of the day we want to know that that's an... that we will be able to live side by side, two states, two people. and if you hear palestinians-- and please challenge me on this-- who would say two states for two people please call me directly even on the 911 number. >> rose: why do you think it's hard for them to say two states for two people? >> thank you. bauds that's the recognition of israel's right for self-determination. of the jewish people's right for self-determination. by sayi two states for two people they acknledge that the refugees do not come back to the statof israel and to the jewish state. so they're saying to the world we want an independent
palestinian state. we want our people to come to the jewish state. that won't work. >> rose: so this is a question of refugees? >> it's a question of refugees. people don't listen to what they say. and this is very, very important because we have ssion. you have to understand, the israeli people passionately believe in peace. we know our neighborhood. you don't to convince us. but we see the risks taken and the people of israel need people not to point fingers at them but give them a big hug in order for us to really do the steps that we need in order to achieve peace with the palestinians and them understanding because their leadership is not telling the people what compromises they have to make. they don't hear it fromheir leaders, they should hear it from the world. >> rose: what compromises do they have to make and what should they be telling their people in your judgment? >> they shoulde telling their people in the right of return is a dream that will not materialize. they should be telling their people that jerusalem will not be the solecapital. they should be telling their
people... >> rose: they're not saying that jerusalem will be theisole capital, are they? he said today in this conversation jerusalem will be the capital for israel and jerusalem will be the capital for the palestinians and it will be... in which both will have access. >> charlie, with all due respect can i say now jerusalem was the capital of the jewish people when london was still a swamp. i don't need the acknowledgment, i ed them to really acknowledge the fact that this is what makes the jewish people... this is the heart. now if you look at this, the good things that happen in wikileaks was that what palestinians were willing to say in the negotiations. that people don't hear it. i do don't hear it on the right of return, on jerusalem, on borders their dreams would not
materialize completely. we have a real debate internally. >> rose: are you saying that the '67 borders is no longer give and take as everybody talks about? is no longer a basisor settlement? are you saying that what used to be called the right of return and now people return to it as refugees no longer negotiable? are you saying that having the palestinian capital in jerusalem is no longer negotiable? three things that are essential to them? >> no, i'm saying exactly opposite. i'm saying everything is negotiable without pre-conditions. people should derstand '67 borders is israel's securities. it's defining israel's borders. it's defining what's defensible... >> rose: '67 boarders? >> yes. so everyone that talks about borders and talks about lines doesn't really remember that israel between the sea it's 25
kilometers. the issues are very tough issues and instead of making speeches or speech making we should go backo peacemaking and that can be done in ramallah and jerusalem, 15-minute drive and not in the united nations. >> dave: what's necessary in your judgment to guarantee israel's security? >> well, i think this is something that i'll give you my views on it. i think one area that has to be controlled by israel is the area along the jordan river. this is not an insurmountable problem. it will be for a defined period of time because what the israelis do not want to have to live with again is what happened in gaza with all these weapons were smuggled in a israel was subject to rocket attacks, thousands upon thousands of rockets, the same thing has beened in lebanon this is not an unreasonable thing to do.
secondly, we here in the states where we have so much expanse of land it's hard to imagine it but i've always said that you n go up on the ridge line of the west bank which is the high ground erlooking israel and a high school student with a rocket could make israel uninhabitable. you could lob rockets into the airport, into jusalem, into tel aviv. so you've got to find some way to control that so it doesn't become a staging ground for attacks on israe now, this doesn't have to be forever because i think over time both sides will get accustomed to living with each other but that's kind of interim security arrangements that i think need to be made. to me, the security issue is the most difficult issue because in a sense it involves some retention of israeli control over some peace of the territory. >> rose: not the west bank? still control parts of the west bank along jordan river. >> yes, but that's a... as i say, the whole of the west bank is just that portion of the... by the way, i think the jordanians would also be happy to have israel in control of
that because they wouldn't have to worry about being attked as well and that is a government that is not necessarily popular with the palestinians. >> rose: but it is the government supporting e palestinian bid for statehood. >> i'm just saying that's not an unreasonable security. it's just security line. >> rose: so here's a case in ich the president says he will ve the security council if it comes to a vote there. and it ends up they get nine. how is his relationship with >> well, i think there has been a great deal of unease over his progressive distancing himself from israel on a lot of these issues. it actually began at the very beginning when he gave the speech in cairo. and, frankly, it's... >> rose: the speech speaking to musl orgizations? >> yes but he made references there to the founding of israel as being just a response to the holocaust when, in fact, this
has... as the ambassador was saying has been the homeland of the jewish people for thousands of years. that's what bringing the jewish people to israel because that's where they were founded as a people. >> rose: is he likely to get the support of the jewish dmunt the presidential election? >> some, he got 78% of the support of the jewish community during the last election. i think there's enough concern over his views on this subject and other issues as well. it's not a community thatjust votes on what issue. his support ther i think will be diminished. >> rose: is there any indication from the congressional vote that took place in brooklyn. >> absolutely. ed koch the mayor of new york, former mayor of new york said that this was going to be a test case and that this is a district that has been democrat i think for5 years and they lost significant jewish support in that district which has a very large jewish community. >> and if, in fact, they vote
and the president does what he said he will do in his speech and what he today the palestinians, will this in any way change the uted states's credibility in the middle east and will it change the united states's capacity to be kind of arbitor in this long standing... >> perhaps but i think a sense what the united states has to stand for are certain sort of immutable principles in a n that negotiations and therefore the united states is opposed to what the palestinians are seeking to do which is really not just to have a resolution, it's the terms of the resolution that will make a negotiation much more difficult and the united states knows better than anybody the attempts to have negotiations privately between the parties which have been turned down by t palestinians. the united states is very much aware of this so they understand what's been going on and not what just people say has been going on. >> rose: the point that
mr. erakat makes as well is that the alternative to a two-state solution is unattractive. that if they fail here, what you're looking at is an israeli state that will be occupying another people and that's what israel wants to be and that's not in israel's interest. >> no, it isn't but, again, we miss the issue of two states for two people i participated as the director general in many negotiations in camp david. we disengaged completely out of gaza with all the votes of occupation, we even took out for settlements in the west bank. they turned it into a terrorist hub lobbing missiles day in and
day out no settlements, you don't have to be a rocket scientist to understand that if rockets fall on your head you're allowed to defend yourself. israel knows that it these achieve peace. the palestinians are now partners to that. we have to be able to sit down and we have done things which are tangibles on the ground from an israeli citizen's point of view we give tangibles. the feeling is that one side reaches that agreement unilateraledly confidence of moving forward in a very, very volatile region and time is very very tough. so what do we want? we want two states for t people living side by side in secuty and peace but it importanthat we will be able to do that with the ability of israel to survive in this
amazing neighborhood that' arou us. >> rose: if, in fact, they fail in the security council they will go to the general assembly. and if that vote is for a palestinian state will it matter? will it make a difference? everything matters but they have a majority which can decide tomorrow morning at the general assembly that the world is flat. does it change anything on the ground? the answer is. no it just raises expectation and frustration which is will lead to violence, not to peace. so yes they can go that avenue but they won't do anything good for their aspirations and ours to achieve a real lasting peace. no real short cuts to this >> and the united states does not support that inart because of what i was referring to before because there will be in that resolution an attempt to determine the borders without dealing with all the other
issues, without necessarily recognizing the security needs of israel. and that is going to make a negotiation much more difficult because what israel really has to negotiate with, they have to negotiate for their security but this is e of the keyhings that they have the negiate with. >> rose: suppose there is a... security council has a veto. suppose there's a vote in the united nations general assembly. so when will there be negotiations? >> rose: tomorrow morning from our point of view. tomorrow morning without any pre-conditions. >> rose: a everything's on the table? >> everything's on the table. but there's one thing that i as we speak i suddenly think of. you know the so-called concerned arab brothers and sisters in the gulf, saudi arabia, the gulf states. they also concern... they are so concerned on what is happening and i was at the donor's conference and you see the pledges. they are sitting there saturated with petrol dollars while i'm here in the united states people
have economic problems. journal disintegrating. they're not giving even crumbs off the table to something they say they should be really interested in doing. sometimes they remind me of those two elderly gentlemen on "the money methow" waldorf and statler sitting there yelling at the lousy show. they can also take responsibility and help out doing something that at the end of the day is in their own interest. so we need,es, people in washington, new york, london, paris, berlin. but also down there to pull up their sleeves and do something constructive instead of throwing stones all the time. rose: has israel's positioned changed? because there is a sense today that... and i raised this before on this program. i thk with you, even. that israe feels under siege. it looks at how the region has s changing.
there is a clear interest in israel among palestinians, the arab world and israel's friends to see this solved. >> yes. but you remember how they repeated... that was a conventional wisdom, charlie. stood up and said the israeli/palestinian conflict is the conflict... the major conflict the middle east. you solve that, you solve all other coerence. syria, egypt. now there's a reputation again and again on issues that say yes look at the world. this is in turmoil. it's like an earthquake taking place. >> rose: and they don't know where they stand with a variety of governments that are in transition. >> so it shows thaeverything around us is changing. so give us at least some credit that we look at this region and say look, security, especially now, even gets more prominence
although-- and i want to say that becauset's the truth-- prime minister netanyahu has a constituency. he went against his political base talking about a two state for two people solution. he gave unprecedented befo any prime minister fro any other party a nine month settlement in order to get the palestinians back into negotiations. he's taken at the beginning all the roadblocks and everything... just the beginning, unprecedented which change the situation in e west ba. the west bank the the only bank that can show 10% growth. so a couple of things were done... >> rose: and ramallah. >> yes, by the prime minister. in order to show good faith. i think it's important to see from the outside yes we feel the security burdens, yes we see the woman around us but yes, we know wet